Archive or Restore Company

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description reveals key behaviors beyond annotations: archiving hides from normal views, is reversible, and is classified as an Update. While annotations already indicate non-destructive/idempotent behavior, the description adds meaningful context about reversibility and impact, though it doesn't mention response details or side effects on related records.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured with a clear opening, usage note, and impact summary. It is concise but slightly redundant in repeating 'reversible' across multiple sections, keeping it from being maximally tight.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's low complexity, full schema coverage, and supporting annotations, the description fully covers what the tool does, when to use it, and its reversible impact. No output schema exists, so describing return values is not required.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the input schema already documents both 'id' and 'archived' clearly. The description only restates the archived=false behavior for reversibility without adding new parameter-level details beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with 'Archive or unarchive a company', a specific verb and resource that clearly states the tool's function. It further distinguishes itself from sibling archive tools by focusing on companies and explains that archiving hides the record without deleting.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It explicitly advises using this tool as 'the reversible alternative to deletion' and says it should be preferred whenever the user wants something removed without permanent deletion. This provides clear when-to-use guidance relative to deletion or other operations.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.